Regional editors pine for days when they were journalists, not managers

I'm going to indulge myself with a moment's nostalgia. Back in the day, the editor of a regional or local newspaper had time to meet and greet local dignitaries.

Those editors mixed with local politicians and business people, and were recognised as figures in their communities. They didn't enjoy Fleet Street-style expenses but they were able to host fairly leisurely lunches and would often spend at least one evening a week attending some kind of event.

Nostalgia over. It is very different today. Many (most?) regional editors never leave their desks. Aside from their increased editorial duties in front of a computer screen, their working days are also filled with all manner of extra management responsibilities.

These additional obligations impinge on their ability to do the one thing that really counts as a journalist - producing as good a newspaper as possible (or, in modern management lingo, "a quality print product").

I have known this for some time, having observed regional editors at work and spoken to several of them about their current work patterns. Needless to say, none have wished to go on the record.

Now comes confirmation of this trend through research carried out by one of their number - Alison Gow, editor of the North Wales Daily Post.

Aware of the changes wrought by the digital revolution, plus the cutbacks in resources and staffing, she explored the problem with "editorial leaders" through a confidential online questionnaire and eight confidential interviews.

Her resulting report, "Dancing on the Fountain: the challenges, competencies and evolution of the UK regional press editor", reveals that her peers are not able to do their journalistic job as they would wish.

Their role has been diminished. They face time pressures that prevent them from devoting enough attention to their papers. They have too few staff. They are forced to act as managers, taking on commercial and operational functions, rather than as journalists.

This has changed their relationship with their reporters and subs. Gow writes:

"There was also a view that staff saw no longer saw editors as a 'great journalist' but as the mouthpiece through which company restructures, redundancies and cost-savings were communicated."

They have, in other words, become reluctant middle managers. In so doing, they are expected to carry out the orders of executives - often located far away from their offices - who seek to implement change without significant investment in training, equipment and personnel.

Gow quotes one editor as saying it "is so hard to be innovative" when "there are no ideas coming forward other than cost-saving.”

She writes of editors expressing "dismay and concern" at the on-going industry disruption while questioning their owners' commitment to the regional newspaper model.

And one editor she interviewed echoed exactly what I wrote above: “Because of the roles they do, editors are not as active in the community as they used to be… they are probably blander than they used to be and that has also diminished their role and importance in people’s eyes.” Exactly.

Similarly, Gow concludes: "Editorial leaders who were questioned exhibited nostalgia for the ‘good times’ and were equally downcast and angered by the disruptive changes their businesses were experiencing."

Gow, whose paper is owned by Trinity Mirror, carried out her study as part of an MA in journalism leadership at the University of Central Lancashire (UClan), led by François Nel.

It is one of five studies in the journalism leadership insight report (available here), which highlights various challenges facing the media.